The Ministry of Education has released the Basic English Vocabulary for Elementary and Junior High School Students(
How should the public react to this initiative?
First, there would be no problem with using the vocabulary list as a reference source for textbook publishers. But it is a mistake to use the list as material for language-proficiency tests. This is because English-language education in elementary and junior- high schools emphasizes the cultivation of students' overall communicative competence rather than any discrete aspect of the language.
Second, from a more academic perspective, Canadian scholars Michael Canale and Merrill Swain argued in 1980 that communicative competence involves four elements -- grammatical, socio-linguistic, discursive and strategic competence. By using the list as material for competency tests, the ministry risks misleading parents and their children to equate "basic English proficiency" with "English lexical ability."
Eventually, the test-oriented approach to teaching will force teachers and students to yield to reality and lay particular stress on the training of isolated, fragmentary language skills. This would undoubtedly contravene the ministry's curriculum guidelines, which clearly stipulate that the goal of English-language education is to "lay a foundation for the public's communicative competence in English and promote an international view as well." Is this situation what the public would like to see?
According to the ministry, another purpose in publishing the list is to resolve the differences between the urban and rural areas. Thus, a threshold of Eng-lish learning has been stipulated as a way of ensuring that students with less resources can also reach the minimum requirement. While the intentions behind this are good, good intentions will not carry one far
This is the biggest obstacle to promoting English-language education in Taiwan today. Ever since English was officially introduced to elementary schools, the central government has neglected its duty to supervise its teaching, allowing each local government to play its own tune. As a result, many of the cities and counties have indulged in head-start programs for younger learners. This has increased disparities among students and made it even more difficult to overcome the gap between the urban and rural areas.
The goal of launching English-language education as part of the Nine-Year Coherent Educational Program was to narrow the gap between rich and poor, to give every student an equal opportunity. Unexpectedly, the promotion of English has become an accessory that deprives students of their equal right to an education and broadens the gap between the urban and rural areas.
Another problem is that the vocabulary list fails to differentiate between the numbers of words required for elementary and junior-high students. This created unnecessary confusion. It also means that parents who are obsessed with "elite education" will certainly not let their children simply learn the minimum requirement.
The ministry's vocabulary list serves at least one purpose -- placing Minister of Education Huang Jong-tsun (
Su Fu-hsing is an associate professor in the department of foreign languages at National Chiayi University.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath